Nets Arena By 2010? Not Bloody Likely

Arena construction takes 24 months and can’t begin until the pending lawsuits are clearedâ€¦Even if the legal challenges end soon, it still would take a scheduled three years to reconstruct bridges on Carlton Avenue and Sixth Avenue, and it would be a very unwise move to open the arena with a major traffic bottleneck next to it. The Carlton Avenue bridge won’t close until January 16. Three years from then would be mid-January, 2011.

Good, this gives me more time to save up for my season tix. I will guarantee you that no current member of the Nets will be on the roster when they tip off in Brooklyn. I think 2012-13 season is more realistic for them to be playing in Brooklyn (if ever).

This is exactly what I have been afraid of – a small band of NIMBY’s causing endless delays based on nonsensical, baseless legal arguments.

I have never assumed AY was a done deal – and anyone who did was being naive. It could go either way at this point but if it doesnt get built I guarantee that the community will be living with the pit and its surrounding ugliness for another 2 decades minimum. Truly a shame

Yeah sure – 95% of what is the proposed AY site has been a (railyard)pit, vacant/parking lots, and decrepit warehouses/garages since at least the 1960′s. Ratner (not my buddy) didnt “create” any of it – but keep spreading your NIMBY propaganda.

Stadium was always intended as a loss leader and will not make money. The residential real estate component to the deal will add thousands of units to a market that likley is already overbuilt. This will lead the developer to delay construction and back out of most of their community benefit agreemetns. Legacy for Brooklyn will be a money losing stadium which creates traffic hell, provides little benefit for adjacent communities and a leaves a “blighted” landscape unitl the project finally gets built out 20 years from now. All subsidized by NYC taxpayers.

It is the height of hubris for any developer to assume that they can build a functioning, cohesive commericial/residential/multi-use development on this scale.

Brooklyn has no need for:
- disruptive development on this scale
- the 100s of minimum wage jobs tied to fickle franchises
- endless roadwork to alleviate predictable traffic congestion
- the bogus civic pride of a fickle NBA franchise
- the tax burden of all of the above

My prediction is the recession (which officially arrived in the headlines today) is going to totally screw up the already wonky spreadsheet justifying the wider AY project and one way or another it is going to dissolve into a shadow of the original plans.

For $2 billion of our taxpayer money, we deserve community involvement, a development that’s in proportion to the space, infrastructure and traffic capacity. We simply do not have that.

Literally no one is saying do not develop. All we are saying is develop while considering factors other than Ratner’s personal wealth.

Also, to laud the additional jobs is beside the point. We’re paying $2 billion for substantially less than $2 billion worth of economic development. We didn’t even give the Yards to the highest bidder. We sold them to Ratner for $50 mil while another developer offered $150.

It’s clear to most of us that our politicians are not operating in the interest of the people they represent.

As in there should be a place for 20,000 people to gather for sports and other things in a city, but not at the junction of almost every major subway line in Brooklyn plus the LIRR if I live near there and need a place to park my SUV.

And there should be housing for more people to live, but not near me if it might mean people who are different than me might move in (richer, poorer, whatever).

I have sympathy for those whose housing is being condemned for more housing. That doesn’t seem right. And I worry about the public costs of the project, especially given that the housing cross-subsidy isn’t going to happen.

The “environmental” arguments are bogus, however — the Nets currently play at an arena off a highway surrounded by parking with no rail access. And as for the “character issue,” that’s just another way of saying people like us are worth more than people like them.

This was in the summer when I saw a nimby at a bar on atlanitc ave harassing a guy because he bought a condo in a “tall” building and calling him names and just going on and on. Finally, after he stopped bit*hing to smoke a cig outside outside, he starts complaining again to someone else. They ended up arguing and one thing led to another and the nimby got his ass beat up bad.

I ended up seeing the end of it, it was very entertaining. I suggested they should do this more often, beat a nimby to the ground festival. Aw, good times.

Sorry, 12:22pm, but I’m not following your enviromental argument. The issues people are concerned about have to do with the already over-taxed sewer system (raw sewage in the Gowanus Canal and back-ups into people’s homes after major rain storms), traffic gridlock, air pollution, construction impacts (incl noise) etc. I do agree with you that it’s a great site for development and, as someone who lives in Prospect Heights, I’ve never a single one of my neighbors dispute that. It’s just that we want something less dense, with fewer taxpayer subsidies and handouts (subway fares are about to increase yet the MTA sold the site to Ratner for under their own valuation), and with more public involvement. As it currently stands, AY is the worse urban planning fiasco to come down the pike in decades.

Please, folks, don’t worry. All of the opponents’ legal battles have failed so far. The eminent domain and environmental review cases are on appeal and will surely be rejected. Most of the candidates they championed lost miserably at the polls. Demolition is proceeding at a brisk pace. Ratner owns and controls most of the land in the footprint. Thanks to leadership steeped in extremist views, the opposition has dwindled to a small band of hysterical computer geeks masquerading as community activists. Really, they have accomplished very little and this thing is indeed a done deal.

1:24 – While I agree with your entire summary of the facts – you have ignored the most worrying factor – TIME. It has taken us years to reach this point and while surely the pro-AY politicians/citizens plus Ratner have the ‘facts’ on our side, costs continue to escalate and the economic outlook is no longer so bright, therefore there is the possibility that this project could be receive the death of a thousand (baseless) cuts.
I will only feel confident that I wont have an open pit and weed grown lots in my neighborhood for another generation when I can actually see the steel rising.

That was my point about the lawsuits. They are in the final stretch and will probably be decided soon. To me, demolition and the announcement of the Carlton St. bridge closure are signs of activity (i.e. the construction of the platform). Time will tell, but I just can’t see Ratner abandoning this project after all of the time and money he’s invested in it.

Very few homes are being condemned for the AY. The vast majority of property being condemned is industrial space. Most of the loud voices protesting the condemnation for AY are other developers, like Weinstein and Boymlergreen who own property there and have lost out to ratner.

The condemnation compensation will be based on the current zoning regulations, not the prospective rezoning (ie R10 in this case)

nolandgrab is a front for these developers, not the dozen or so residential owners who are being displaced.

(Not in my back yard. As in there should be a place for 20,000 people to gather for sports and other things in a city, but not at the junction of almost every major subway line in Brooklyn plus the LIRR if I live near there and need a place to park my SUV.)

No. As in if 20,000 people want a place to gather for sports and other things in a city, why should it be subsidized by the small to medium scale residential community around it? Why provide parking for 4,000 cars at the most congested intersection in Brooklyn, if the public trasnportation here is so good? Why close streets to give the land away to a single developer, instead of providing infrastructure for multiple developers over time as the market develops? As in haven’t we learned anything from the failed “urban planning” fiascos of previous generations?